Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Cut Delhomme


HSCBandit07

Recommended Posts

So I hear that the Panthers are considering cutting Delhomme to save money (no links). Is it possible to cut him and resign him for far less? I would feel more comfortable with a veteran somewhere in the depth chart that knows our system. Even if he needs to clear wavers or something, I'm sure that won't be a problem (excluding maybe the browns?). Sorry to start a new thread about this, just curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would all depend on whether or not there is a cap... if there is a cap then cutting him would cause some pretty serious cap implications for us (most specifically a ton of dead money counting against our cap). If there is no cap, then we could cut him with much less of a financial penalty. Teams in general are expected to do quite a bit of "salary dumping" if there is no cap this year, it's a chance to clean the books without the cap implications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, Delhomme renegotiated last year to help us stay under the Cap. He took a hit to his pay before the year started, but it also came with the caveat that we would pay him millions this year, no matter what.

So, he has a disastrous year in 2009, and we're still on the hook for his millions this year. Do you cut him? No. His impact against the cap (should there be one) is the same either way. His real dollar cost will be the same, either way. So, you keep him on the team at second string QB.

Why? Well, it wouldn't make any financial sense to cut Delhomme and then try to pick up an experienced back-up for Moore... in effect paying double. What's more, Delhomme could come in as a back up at a moment's notice, since he knows the system and the players. In addition, he can mentor Moore in the system and the players, improving Moore's chances, something no one else will be able to do from the #2 QB position.

And lastly, if he comes into a game off of the bench, he could show that he has his game back and we'd be in good shape.

Cut him and well, might as well just set a few million dollars on fire. A few disgruntled fans could dance around the flames and feel vindicated. Yeah, that'd be a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, Delhomme renegotiated last year to help us stay under the Cap. He took a hit to his pay before the year started, but it also came with the caveat that we would pay him millions this year, no matter what.

So, he has a disastrous year in 2009, and we're still on the hook for his millions this year. Do you cut him? No. His impact against the cap (should there be one) is the same either way. His real dollar cost will be the same, either way. So, you keep him on the team at second string QB.

Why? Well, it wouldn't make any financial sense to cut Delhomme and then try to pick up an experienced back-up for Moore... in effect paying double. What's more, Delhomme could come in as a back up at a moment's notice, since he knows the system and the players. In addition, he can mentor Moore in the system and the players, improving Moore's chances, something no one else will be able to do from the #2 QB position.

And lastly, if he comes into a game off of the bench, he could show that he has his game back and we'd be in good shape.

Cut him and well, might as well just set a few million dollars on fire. A few disgruntled fans could dance around the flames and feel vindicated. Yeah, that'd be a good idea.

You're already setting money on fire by keeping him. He's useless. Knowing the sytem sure did us good last season :rolleyes:

You cut him because...

#1 He'll be interfering with competant QBs fighting for the starting job

#2 You don't want him teaching anyone anything

#3 He brings absolutely nothing to the table and if anything will hurt the team more if he sees the field again

#4 Other QBs on the roster will realize they have a legit shot at the starting gig without looking over thier shoulder

#5 He's taking up a roster spot that can be used for someone that can actually play QB

So in the end if it means we have to pay a lil more to get rid of a worthless QB and sign another thats worth a poo, so be it. Hurney and Fox got themselves in this mess and they'll have to bite the bullet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

didn't John Clayton JUST say on ESPN that he still thinks (based on what he's heard) that Delhomme will be the starter in week one next year?

well, knowing Fox......I think most Panther fans should be prepared for that. I mean, Jake was never benched and Fox stated Jake would have still been playing last year if not for injury. Jake is a Fox guy and Moore isn't.......the only way Moore wins a camp battle in Fox's eyes is if the big guy tells Fox who he has to start.....otherwise, Jake will start week 1. I am almost certain that in Fox's eyes.....the turnaround was mostly credited to the team and not QB play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, knowing Fox......I think most Panther fans should be prepared for that. I mean, Jake was never benched and Fox stated Jake would have still been playing last year if not for injury. Jake is a Fox guy and Moore isn't.......the only way Moore wins a camp battle in Fox's eyes is if the big guy tells Fox who he has to start.....otherwise, Jake will start week 1. I am almost certain that in Fox's eyes.....the turnaround was mostly credited to the team and not QB play.

It will definately be intersting to see how the QB position plays out. I for starters would like to see the organization make a move to try and bring in either J.Campbell or T.Jackson to compete for the starting position but we all know that isnt going to happen and has been debated in many threads on this board. So that being said, I can definately see Jake starting in week one no matter what happens in TC and the pre-season unless he completely implodes or Moore is outstanding above belief. The only difference next season is Jake will be on a short leash and get pulled right away if he sucks so bad again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/12642811-can-i-change-the-name-on-my-cruise-reservation-guest-service-24hr-short
    • I'm not a fan for a couple reasons. You have to nail your 1st 2 picks, especially when you're lacking as much talent across the board as we were and you traded away the number 1 overall pick. Barring injury, they need to be immediate 4 year starters, and on this team, that's a pretty low bar to hurdle. I also really hated the FA strategy building up to the draft, particularly the guards, and the draft strategy itself. A strategy that focused on building around a QB that was so terrible he had no business being on the field. It was clear to pretty much everyone, BY wasn't ready to be an NFL starter. We dumped everything to build around him in the hopes he would become what we drafted him to be. And while the end of the year started showing some promise, we still don't know going into year 3 if he's going to live up to the hype. Dumping all your resources to build around a single player (and hope for the best) isn't as important as building a complete team.  If there's any certainty in drafting, it's HQ interior linemen are found in rounds 2-3, and even 4 pretty regularly. Dumping a ton of FA cash into those 2 spots didn't make sense when we have so many holes. Draft guards, pay tackles. It's one of the staple principles of oline building.  XL was always a project. He didn't have years of consistent high end performance in college. His hands are bricks, he body catches a lot, and he looks more like a 4th round receiver than a 1st. Maybe he improves, maybe not. He looked extremely raw as a rookie and we can only hope he might develop by the time his rookie contract expires. I'm always a fan of drafting guys that actually have hands coming out of college. Who cares if you can get open, or fight for the ball, when you can't actually come down with it consistently.  Then we get to Brooks. Taking a RB with a torn ACL who may or may not see the field in 24/25 over Zach Frasier, who already looks the vet at a position we've been severely deficient at since pre-injury Ryan Kalil. Relying on Corbett, coming off injury, to move from guard to center is never ideal, and the injury bug bit yet again, and we were scrambling trying to find someone to lead our 200m offensive line. And the worst part, we traded up to do it giving up 2 5ths to take Brooks when we're lacking talent everywhere.  Wallace, meh. Sanders looked good before that neck injury. But now we're into day 3 where expectations aren't extremely high for making the roster, unless it's the Panthers, but you can find some position players and rotational players to start plugging the Swiss cheese roster.  I give him credit for getting Coker as an UDFA and the trade for Jackson, but if that's the highlight of your draft, there's some serious problems with your drafting.  If we had saved the FA money spent on the guards, drafted JPJ and Frazier, and still been in pretty close to the same spot, better off cash wise (or spent on other FAs) going into FA this year. Coker ended up playing better than XL in less time. Brooks is Eric Shelton 2.0 right now. And we used 5 picks in the 1st 2 rounds, if you count those included in the trades. That's too much given up for a team that won 2 games the year prior. JMO, but I think the whole offseason strategy last year was flawed from start to finish.  
    • Everything hinges on his ability to build through the draft so it's unknown until we see the upcoming draft class in action. That's all that will ultimately matter. We cannot afford anymore duds or projects especially in the early rounds.
×
×
  • Create New...